42 minutes ago, jpe828 said:

I run a Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700XT, with 32gbs of ram. I have it on 1440P, with a widescreen monitor. Running mostly high settings, with a couple Ultra such as clouds. I get 36 FPS on a pretty typical VFR day. Can dip under 30 in heavy weather, heavy scenery areas. Certainly not ideal, I would consider it at a bare minimum. Any other games my system is very good at running 1440p. 

The strange this is my CPU only ever hits 40 percent usage MAX. The vid card is always 99 percent maxed out. No overclock or anything, I found it to unstable.

Most videos I've seen indicate this is graphics card limited.  At 4K there isnt much difference in mid to upper cpu's.  

1 hour ago, jpe828 said:

I run a Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700XT, with 32gbs of ram. I have it on 1440P, with a widescreen monitor. Running mostly high settings, with a couple Ultra such as clouds. I get 36 FPS on a pretty typical VFR day. Can dip under 30 in heavy weather, heavy scenery areas. Certainly not ideal, I would consider it at a bare minimum. Any other games my system is very good at running 1440p. 

The strange this is my CPU only ever hits 40 percent usage MAX. The vid card is always 99 percent maxed out. No overclock or anything, I found it to unstable.

I have the same setup, aside from having a 1080ti. I get 45ish FPS while flying VFR planes. I would have expected a 5700xt to perform at least that well. 

1 hour ago, jpe828 said:

 

 

Edited November 19, 20205 yr by Jeeper
Oops

1 hour ago, jpe828 said:

 

 

Edited November 19, 20205 yr by Jeeper
Oops again

1 hour ago, Maxis said:

This doesn't make any sense. Hopefully you return it before the refund period expires.

It only makes sense if I am going to return it, which is almost certainly going to happen before January 31, 2021. 👍

26 minutes ago, Jeeper said:

I have the same setup, aside from having a 1080ti. I get 45ish FPS while flying VFR planes. I would have expected a 5700xt to perform at least that well. 

I don't think AMD does as well with the sim. I can't figure it out ,I was surprised that I wasn't getting better. What are your settings though? Can have a large impact. Posting pics on here isn't straight forward otherwise I would post screenshots here. 

1 hour ago, jpe828 said:

I don't think AMD does as well with the sim. I can't figure it out ,I was surprised that I wasn't getting better. What are your settings though? Can have a large impact. Posting pics on here isn't straight forward otherwise I would post screenshots here. 

Im not surprised, Gaming is intel dominated due to single core frequency advantages. This was only toppled by AMD less than two weeks ago with the brand new Zen 3 cpus. So unless you have a brand new Zen 3 5600X or 5800X or the game becomes VERY optimized for multicore under direct x 12 you will always be at a somewhat disadvantage to the current intel equivalent. I still went ahead and bought an Ryzen 3700X based rig knowing that they (AMD) would catch up  to intel eventually and their platform is more modern overall. (They already dominate in multicore and productivity applications.. i could deal with a few less frames in games at the moment and next year i am getting one of those Zen 3 chips anyway.

Speaking for myself and the current limitations of my rig im happy with my choices (it was a long game decision) and how the sim performs well even though its not an intel based platform.

Edited November 19, 20205 yr by Maxis

MFS is coming to Xbox and if I'm not mistaken the Xbox hardware is AMD-based. So it might be reasonable to expect that the game will become increasingly tuned to AMD making it a good bet to base a new system on it. Synergies between the MFS code and AMD drivers could be very good. The video looks like great performance and the slight stutter is quite possibly a result of recording on the same PC. The big risk I see is if MFS goes to true ray tracing in the future but I don't recall any rumours to that effect.

With the 3950X and 5700XT, I find performance to be fine, 55 fps up in the clouds and no major hiccups lower down on 'high end' preset settings. 

I have the sim on an NVME drive, 200mbit internet, rolling cache on.  And a custom watercooling loop to keep everything nice and cool.

I'm flying GA aircraft in less populated areas mostly though.  I can't speak to the business jets or tubeliners in large cities like JFK (although I can try it if someone wants me to).

The performance of this sim is all over the place based on a lot of factors, so I don't agree with blanket statements like "AMD doesn't do well".  For example, near KMHV there are a ton of wind turbines and the wind turbine code seems to eat a ton of CPU and cause the sim to be 'limited by main thread' at like 30fps in that area.   As soon as you get away from the turbines, it's back to normal speeds.  AI traffic or Real Time Traffic, and multiplayer traffic can all impact performance.  Unless you're doing controlled testing with the exact same settings in the exact same place, I don't think you can make a blanket conclusion.  Plenty of people with Intel systems also report performance that seems low compared to others.

Edited November 19, 20205 yr by marsman2020

Have to agree with marsman2020

in my case i tried to get the most balanced system for what i could afford at the moment (3700x/Rtx2800 super/ B550 chipset / 2 separate NVMe's for OS and storage and 32 gigs of ram @ 3600 cas 16) Unlike Marsman i prefer jets and airliners and my settings are 3440x1440p on Ultra. The sim when fully loaded up with scenery and clouds in a glass cockpit will sit in the high thirties low forties but it is smooth and stutter free and im ok with that. My plan is to replace the CPU and GPU  early next year and the chipset platform allows that movement. 

So the variance in application use (GA vs Tubeliner) / HW config and software config (Bios / Driver settings etc) has a big role to play in ones experience. Not to say as i said previously that Intel doesnt have an inherent single core performance advantage (for right now) but if you start cranking up settings as i have you start to become GPUbound and the intel advantage is somewhat minimized.

Edited November 19, 20205 yr by Maxis

In my opinion, a balanced "60 FPS mostly Ultra" system would be:

1440p:

R5 5600X / 32 GB 3600 MHz / RX 6800 or RTX 3070

1440p Ultrawide:

R7 5800X or R9 5900X / 64 GB 3600 MHz / RX 6800XT or RTX 3080

4K:

R9 5950X / 64 GB 4000 MHz / RX 6900XT or RTX 3090 (or 3080 ti when that arrives)

My own experience is this:

I have an R9 3900X, 64 GB 3600 MHz system with an 3440x1440 60 Hz Ultrawide monitor.  At first I had an RTX 2080 Super. It was for the most part going at 99% GPU load. Then I tried an RTX 3090, and the GPU load fell to the 65-85% range. The RTX 3090 was too expensive for me to keep, and completely out of balance for my system. I could not get a hold of an RTX 3080, so I bought an RTX 3070 until I can upgrade.

But what I found out about the RTX 3070 was pretty interesting. Depending on the area you fly in, GPU load is rarely going over the 95%. In urban enviroments it goes down to about 80%, completely CPU constrained. In open areas it sometimes goes up to 95%.

The point is,  I'm still constrained by my R9 3900X with an RTX 3070. 

 

Edited November 19, 20205 yr by Republic3D

The sim is still changing a bunch, Update 7 is supposed to have some CPU code refactoring.  And the 5xxx CPUs are sold out everywhere. 

I should add I'm running 1440p right now with the 5700XT. 

I'm anxiously awaiting the lifting of the NDA on the MSFS VR version, I want to get real feedback from other simmers before I embark on a possible upgrade for VR.

1 hour ago, Republic3D said:

In my opinion, a balanced "60 FPS mostly Ultra" system would be:

1440p:

R5 5600X / 32 GB 3600 MHz / RX 6800 or RTX 3070

1440p Ultrawide:

R7 5800X or R9 5900X / 64 GB 3600 MHz / RX 6800XT or RTX 3080

4K:

R9 5950X / 64 GB 4000 MHz / RX 6900XT or RTX 3090 (or 3080 ti when that arrives)

My own experience is this:

I have an R9 3900X, 64 GB 3600 MHz system with an 3440x1440 60 Hz Ultrawide monitor.  At first I had an RTX 2080 Super. It was for the most part going at 99% GPU load. Then I tried an RTX 3090, and the GPU load fell to the 65-85% range. The RTX 3090 was too expensive for me to keep, and completely out of balance for my system. I could not get a hold of an RTX 3080, so I bought an RTX 3070 until I can upgrade.

But what I found out about the RTX 3070 was pretty interesting. Depending on the area you fly in, GPU load is rarely going over the 95%. In urban enviroments it goes down to about 80%, completely CPU constrained. In open areas it sometimes goes up to 95%.

The point is,  I'm still constrained by my R9 3900X with an RTX 3070. 

 

 

Specs are pretty much on point

I was aiming for the 5800X (for the core count) and an 6800XT/RTX 3080 to feed the ultrawide (im still not expecting consistent 60fps though with the way i use the sim (heavies/ glass cockpits and such) and my preference to max out the settings but i will be happy sitting in the fifties dropping into the low forties in scenery dense areas.

Granted Asobo promised more CPU optimizations down the road so hopefully they can start using more cores and such to lower cpu single core utilization.

2 hours ago, Republic3D said:

64 GB 4000 MHz

You don’t need 64GB of ram. Not for MSFS, under any settings. 

Here's a series of benchmarks with recent GPU's and CPU's.

Text is in Dutch, but the graphs say it all.

https://tweakers.net/reviews/8356/3/microsoft-flight-simulator-op-reis-met-ryzen-5000-en-geforce-3000-gpu-benchmarks.html

https://tweakers.net/reviews/8356/4/microsoft-flight-simulator-op-reis-met-ryzen-5000-en-geforce-3000-cpu-benchmarks.html